Book•
Institutions and Organizations
22 May 1995-
TL;DR: Early Institutionalists Constructed an Analytic Framework I Three Pillars of Institutions Constructing an Analytical Framework II Content, Agency, Carriers and Levels Institutional Construction, Maintenance and Diffusion Institutional Processes Affecting Societal Systems, Organizational Fields, and Organizational Populations Institutional processes Affecting Organizational Structure and Performance Institutional Change Looking Back, Looking Forward
Abstract: Introduction Early Institutionalists Institutional Theory and Organizations Constructing an Analytic Framework I Three Pillars of Institutions Constructing an Analytic Framework II Content, Agency, Carriers and Levels Institutional Construction, Maintenance and Diffusion Institutional Processes Affecting Societal Systems, Organizational Fields, and Organizational Populations Institutional Processes Affecting Organizational Structure and Performance Institutional Change Looking Back, Looking Forward
Citations
More filters
••
TL;DR: A growing number of sociologists, political scientists, economists, and organizational theorists have invoked the concept of social capital in the search for answers to a broadening range of questions being confronted in their own fields as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: A growing number of sociologists, political scientists, economists, and organizational theorists have invoked the concept of social capital in the search for answers to a broadening range of questions being confronted in their own fields. Seeking to clarify the concept and help assess its utility for organizational theory, we synthesize the theoretical research undertaken in these various disciplines and develop a common conceptual framework that identifies the sources, benefits, risks, and contingencies of social capital.
8,518 citations
••
TL;DR: The position that the concept of sensemaking fills important gaps in organizational theory is taken, by pinpointing central features of sense making that have been assumed but not made explicit, some of which have changed in significance over time, and some ofWhich have been missing all along or have gone awry.
Abstract: Sensemaking involves turning circumstances into a situation that is comprehended explicitly in words and that serves as a springboard into action. In this paper we take the position that the concept of sensemaking fills important gaps in organizational theory. The seemingly transient nature of sensemaking belies its central role in the determination of human behavior, whether people are acting in formal organizations or elsewhere. Sensemaking is central because it is the primary site where meanings materialize that inform and constrain identity and action. The purpose of this paper is to take stock of the concept of sensemaking. We do so by pinpointing central features of sensemaking, some of which have been explicated but neglected, some of which have been assumed but not made explicit, some of which have changed in significance over time, and some of which have been missing all along or have gone awry. We sense joint enthusiasm to restate sensemaking in ways that make it more future oriented, more action oriented, more macro, more closely tied to organizing, meshed more boldly with identity, more visible, more behaviorally defined, less sedentary and backward looking, more infused with emotion and with issues of sensegiving and persuasion. These key enhancements provide a foundation upon which to build future studies that can strengthen the sensemaking perspective.
4,894 citations
••
TL;DR: The authors provides an overview of recent developments in historical institutionalism and assesses the progress in understanding institutional formation and change, drawing on insights from recent historical institutional work on icritical juncturesi and on ipolicy feedbacks.
Abstract: This article provides an overview of recent developments in historical institutionalism. First, it reviews some distinctions that are commonly drawn between the ihistoricali and the irational choicei variants of institutionalism and shows that there are more points of tangency than typically assumed. However, differences remain in how scholars in the two traditions approach empirical problems. The contrast of rational choiceis emphasis on institutions as coordination mechanisms that generate or sustain equilibria versus historical institutionalismis emphasis on how institutions emerge from and are embedded in concrete temporal processes serves as the foundation for the second half of the essay, which assesses our progress in understanding institutional formation and change. Drawing on insights from recent historical institutional work on icritical juncturesi and on ipolicy feedbacks,i the article proposes a way of thinking about institutional evolution and path dependency that provides an alternative to equilibrium and other approaches that separate the analysis of institutional stability from that of institutional change.
4,425 citations
Cites background from "Institutions and Organizations"
...Rather, institutions are socially constructed in the sense that they embody shared cultural understandings (“shared cognitions,” “interpretive frames”) of the way the world works (Meyer & Rowen 1991, Scott 1995:33, Zucker 1983:5)....
[...]
••
TL;DR: In this paper, a typology of four transition pathways: transformation, reconfiguration, technological substitution, and de-alignment and re-alignments is presented, which differ in combinations of timing and nature of multi-level interactions.
3,926 citations
Cites methods from "Institutions and Organizations"
...Following Scott’s (1995) synthesis of institutional theory, we distinguish three...
[...]
••
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors propose an institutional theory of corporate social responsibility consisting of a series of propositions specifying the conditions under which corporations are likely to behave in socially responsible ways, and argue that the relationship between basic economic conditions and corporate behavior is mediated by several institutional conditions: public and private regulation, the presence of nongovernmental and other independent organizations that monitor corporate behaviour, institutionalized norms regarding appropriate corporate behavior, associative behavior among corporations themselves, and organized dialogues among corporations and their stakeholders.
Abstract: I offer an institutional theory of corporate social responsibility consisting of a series of propositions specifying the conditions under which corporations are likely to behave in socially responsible ways. I argue that the relationship between basic economic conditions and corporate behavior is mediated by several institutional conditions: public and private regulation, the presence of nongovernmental and other independent organizations that monitor corporate behavior, institutionalized norms regarding appropriate corporate behavior, associative behavior among corporations themselves, and organized dialogues among corporations and their stakeholders. Concerns about corporate social responsibility have grown significantly during the last two decades. Not only has the issue become commonplace in the business press and among business and political leaders (Buhr & Graf
3,806 citations